Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Environment

Environment Environmental Politics Forum - Environmental issues, global warming, pollution, and proposals


Thanks Tree103Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old January 2nd, 2017, 07:19 PM   #31
Senior Member
 
Nwolfe35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Posts: 14,410
Quote:
Originally Posted by justoneman View Post
Yes and the steep angle of the forecast is based on the current "fudged" number.


The bottom line is that this should be called a theory not a fact. The theory is that man can affect some change in the climate. Frankly it is a ridiculous theory. All this so some socialists can control, though taxation, people. Liberals are fixated on cow farts, while terrorists are picking away at the foundations of western society.
"Ridiculous Theory"?

First of all, please state your credentials that we should know about that says you get to say what is, or is not, a ridiculous theory on climate.

Secondly, as HD pointed out, we have had a MASSIVE effect on our environment...why should our atmosphere be any different?
Thanks from Clara007 and Daws77
Nwolfe35 is offline  
Old January 2nd, 2017, 07:25 PM   #32
Senior Member
 
justoneman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: chicago
Posts: 2,432
Quote:
Originally Posted by hot dragon View Post
look again. look from about 1950 to 2016. that part isnt a forecast. (unless you really do live in the past)
The numbers have been fudged. It has been proven that all temps have been rounded up instead of down.
justoneman is offline  
Old January 2nd, 2017, 07:29 PM   #33
Senior Member
 
justoneman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: chicago
Posts: 2,432
Quote:
Originally Posted by hot dragon View Post
why is it so ridiculous? humanity has had a massive affect on the earth. we have affected the surface of the earth dramatically, in places we have turned forests into deserts. we have driven countless species to extinction, or to the brink. we have changed whole rivers, we have terraformed entire islands. when it comes to waterways, biodiversity, forestation, we have had a dramatic, massive affect, why should the atmosphere be immune?
because changing some physical features does not mean we have changed the temperature. It just doesn't. Because it is possible makes it a theory not a fact. Science (real science) requires a theory to be absolutely proven before it is called a fact.
justoneman is offline  
Old January 2nd, 2017, 07:53 PM   #34
Senior Member
 
Nwolfe35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Posts: 14,410
Quote:
Originally Posted by justoneman View Post
because changing some physical features does not mean we have changed the temperature. It just doesn't. Because it is possible makes it a theory not a fact. Science (real science) requires a theory to be absolutely proven before it is called a fact.
The only thing this statement proves is that you have no clue what a scientific theory is.

Scientific theories NEVER become "facts"...as far as the scientific field is concerned a Scientific Theory IS a fact unless something comes along and proves otherwise.

Definition of a Scientific Theory: A well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed, preferably using a written, pre-defined, protocol of observations and experiments.

Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge
Thanks from Daws77
Nwolfe35 is offline  
Old January 2nd, 2017, 08:02 PM   #35
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: LA LA Land North
Posts: 25,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by justoneman View Post
because changing some physical features does not mean we have changed the temperature. It just doesn't. Because it is possible makes it a theory not a fact. Science (real science) requires a theory to be absolutely proven before it is called a fact.
As I have said before, why don't you go to the top of the Empire State Building and jump off. After all, gravity is just a theory which has not ever been proven as absolute fact.
Thanks from Clara007
RNG is offline  
Old January 2nd, 2017, 08:11 PM   #36
Senior Member
 
justoneman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: chicago
Posts: 2,432
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nwolfe35 View Post
The only thing this statement proves is that you have no clue what a scientific theory is.

Scientific theories NEVER become "facts"...as far as the scientific field is concerned a Scientific Theory IS a fact unless something comes along and proves otherwise.

Definition of a Scientific Theory: A well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed, preferably using a written, pre-defined, protocol of observations and experiments.

Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge
You don't know what you are talking about. In science there is a distinction between theory and fact.

Quote:
Fact


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Jump to: navigation, search

A fact is something that has really occurred or is actually true. The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability—that is, whether it can be demonstrated to correspond to experience. Standard reference works are often used to check facts. Scientific facts are verified by repeatable careful observation or measurement (by experiments or other means).

For other uses, see Fact (disambiguation).
justoneman is offline  
Old January 2nd, 2017, 08:12 PM   #37
Senior Member
 
justoneman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: chicago
Posts: 2,432
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
As I have said before, why don't you go to the top of the Empire State Building and jump off. After all, gravity is just a theory which has not ever been proven as absolute fact.
Gravity is a fact not a theory. Man changing the climate is a theory.
justoneman is offline  
Old January 2nd, 2017, 08:21 PM   #38
Banned
 
coke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: nunya
Posts: 12,580
Quote:
Originally Posted by hot dragon View Post
look again. look from about 1950 to 2016. that part isnt a forecast. (unless you really do live in the past)
I have looked. It is the typical graph that is designed to show a bias. For starters, its not even a graph. It is graffiti. Secondly notice how the solid continues past the current year? That is done to attempt to make it look like a really big astounding curve. Its basically propaganda designed to look like science.

Quote:
Averaged over all land and ocean surfaces, temperatures have warmed roughly 1.33°F (0.74ºC) over the last century, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (see page 2 of the IPCC's Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report Summary for Policymakers (PDF)).
https://globalclimate.ucr.edu/resources.html

See that? No graffiti, no silly little cartoons. Just brass tacks of the last 100 years. Now another thing to keep in mind.

Quote:
Data are collected at thousands of meteorological stations, buoys and ships around the globe. The longest-running temperature record is the Central England temperature data series, that starts in 1659. The longest-running quasi-global record starts in 1850.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instru...erature_record

So with that in mind, what it comes down to is the Scientific community is basing a hell of a lot of forecasts on assumptions. We really have no idea how vast the temperature swings were on a global scale 700 years ago. The best records we have our old ships manuscripts and descriptions of battles and the such. Even those are not actual recorded temperatures. They are just mentions of it was cold and wet, or sunny and hot or a bad storm. Yes, I am aware that geology and other various earth sciences can look at data and get an idea of the type climate, but to actually start narrowing down the temperature by even a few degrees is crap.
coke is offline  
Old January 2nd, 2017, 08:27 PM   #39
Senior Member
 
Nwolfe35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Posts: 14,410
Quote:
Originally Posted by justoneman View Post
Gravity is a fact not a theory. Man changing the climate is a theory.
Once again you are showing that you do not understand what a scientific theory is.

Gravitation is a fact, objects with mass exert an attractive force on each other.

What CAUSES gravitation is a theory (The Theory of Gravity), although we have a damn good idea as to what causes gravitation thus, for all intents and purposes, the theory of gravity is a fact.

Climate Change is a fact, the average temperature on earth is rising at an accelerated rate (along with other environmental factors)

What CAUSES Climate Change is a theory, but we have a damn good idea what is causing Climate Change thus, for all intents an purposes, the manmade theory of climate change is a fact.
Thanks from Daws77

Last edited by Nwolfe35; January 2nd, 2017 at 08:31 PM.
Nwolfe35 is offline  
Old January 2nd, 2017, 08:30 PM   #40
Senior Member
 
Nwolfe35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Posts: 14,410
Quote:
Originally Posted by coke View Post
I have looked. It is the typical graph that is designed to show a bias. For starters, its not even a graph. It is graffiti. Secondly notice how the solid continues past the current year? That is done to attempt to make it look like a really big astounding curve. Its basically propaganda designed to look like science.


https://globalclimate.ucr.edu/resources.html

See that? No graffiti, no silly little cartoons. Just brass tacks of the last 100 years. Now another thing to keep in mind.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instru...erature_record

So with that in mind, what it comes down to is the Scientific community is basing a hell of a lot of forecasts on assumptions. We really have no idea how vast the temperature swings were on a global scale 700 years ago. The best records we have our old ships manuscripts and descriptions of battles and the such. Even those are not actual recorded temperatures. They are just mentions of it was cold and wet, or sunny and hot or a bad storm. Yes, I am aware that geology and other various earth sciences can look at data and get an idea of the type climate, but to actually start narrowing down the temperature by even a few degrees is crap.
You do realize that what you have linked to basically confirms what HD said.
Nwolfe35 is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Environment

Tags
change, climate, republicans



Search tags for this page
Click on a term to search for related topics.
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Here's All The Nonsense 2016 Republicans Have Spouted About Climate Change LongWinded Current Events 10 December 3rd, 2015 01:38 AM
Republicans React to Climate Change Report With Denial and Hatred klaatu Current Events 9 August 9th, 2014 06:35 PM
Murdoch on climate change. roastpork Environment 11 July 24th, 2014 06:00 AM
The LIABILITY, for climate change: bobgnote Environment 34 December 26th, 2013 04:00 AM
fixing climate change webguy4 Environment 31 May 17th, 2013 02:01 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.